From nobody Thu Sep 11 20:40:57 2025 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AACEB64DD for ; Sat, 5 Aug 2023 07:22:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229890AbjHEHWE (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Aug 2023 03:22:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43770 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229816AbjHEHVk (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Aug 2023 03:21:40 -0400 Received: from wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.130.52]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2634E4EC8; Sat, 5 Aug 2023 00:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ip4d148da6.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.20.141.166] helo=truhe.fritz.box); authenticated by wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1qSBbT-0002p2-NF; Sat, 05 Aug 2023 09:21:35 +0200 From: Thorsten Leemhuis To: Greg KH , stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sasha Levin , Jonathan Corbet Subject: [PATCH v1 4/5] docs: stable-kernel-rules: fine-tune various details Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2023 09:21:32 +0200 Message-Id: X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.40.1 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;linux@leemhuis.info;1691220098;d8ef99a8; X-HE-SMSGID: 1qSBbT-0002p2-NF Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" * various fine tuning to the text that cleans up rough edges the three previous preparatory patches left behind to keep the diffs simpler * s/Linus' tree/mainline/g, as that's the term more commonly used and known * create a short intro for the three submission options and streamline the explanation when to use which of them * fix a >=3D vs <=3D thinko in an example to make it more straight forward * there were two blank lines before some sub-headings and just one before others; use the former style everywhere CC: Greg KH CC: Sasha Levin CC: Jonathan Corbet Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis --- Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 72 ++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/= process/stable-kernel-rules.rst index 597016297fb4..2b7f04211d9d 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which one= s are not, into the - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, white= space cleanups, etc). =20 + Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree ---------------------------------------------------- =20 @@ -41,33 +42,40 @@ Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree =20 There are three options to submit a change to -stable trees: =20 -:ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, is the easiest and most common. -:ref:`option_2` and :ref:`option_3` are more useful if the patch isn't dee= med -worthy at the time it is applied to a public git tree (for instance, becau= se -it deserves more regression testing first). :ref:`option_3` is especially -useful if the original upstream patch needs to be backported (for example -the backport needs some special handling due to e.g. API changes). + 1. Add a 'stable tag' to the description of a patch you then submit for + mainline inclusion. + 2. Ask the stable team to pick up a patch already mainlined. + 3. Submit a patch to the stable team that is equivalent to a change alrea= dy + mainlined. + +The sections below describe each of the options in more detail. + +:ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, it is the easiest and most comm= on. +:ref:`option_2` is mainly meant for changes where backporting was not cons= idered +at the time of submission. :ref:`option_3` is an alternative to the two ea= rlier +options for cases where a mainlined patch needs adjustments to apply in ol= der +series (for example due to API changes). =20 .. _option_1: =20 Option 1 ******** =20 -To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag +To have a patch you submit for mainline inclusion later automatically pick= ed up +for stable trees, add the tag =20 .. code-block:: none =20 Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org =20 -in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to the +in the sign-off area. Once the patch is mainlined it will be applied to the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author or subsystem maintainer. =20 -To accompany a note to the stable team, use a shell-style inline comment (= see -below for details): +To sent additional instructions to the stable team, use a shell-style inli= ne +comment: =20 - * Additionally, some patches submitted via :ref:`option_1` may have addit= ional - patch prerequisites which can be cherry-picked. This can be specified i= n the + * To specify any additional patch prerequisites for cherry picking use the following format in the sign-off area: =20 .. code-block:: none @@ -87,8 +95,8 @@ below for details): git cherry-pick fd21073 git cherry-pick =20 - * Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites. This can be - specified in the following format in the sign-off area: + * For patches that may have kernel version prerequisites specify them usi= ng + the following format in the sign-off area: =20 .. code-block:: none =20 @@ -102,27 +110,28 @@ below for details): =20 For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version. =20 - * To delay pick up of patches submitted via :ref:`option_1`, use the foll= owing - format: + Note, such tagging is unnecessary if the stable team can derive the + appropriate versions from Fixes: tags. + + * To delay pick up of patches, use the following format: =20 .. code-block:: none =20 Cc: # after 4 weeks in mainline =20 - * For any other requests related to patches submitted via :ref:`option_1`= , just - add a note to the stable tag. This for example can be used to point out= known - problems: + * For any other requests, just add a note to the stable tag. This for exa= mple + can be used to point out known problems: =20 .. code-block:: none =20 - Cc: # see patch description, needs adjustmen= ts for >=3D 6.3 + Cc: # see patch description, needs adjustmen= ts for <=3D 6.3 =20 .. _option_2: =20 Option 2 ******** =20 -After the patch has been merged to Linus' tree, send an email to +If the patch already has been merged to mainline, send an email to stable@vger.kernel.org containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID, why you think it should be applied, and what kernel version you wish it to be applied to. @@ -133,16 +142,9 @@ Option 3 ******** =20 Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to -stable@vger.kernel.org. You must note the upstream commit ID in the -changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish -it to be applied to. - -Note that for :ref:`option_3`, if the patch deviates from the original -upstream patch (for example because it had to be backported) this must be = very -clearly documented and justified in the patch description. - -The upstream commit ID must be specified with a separate line above the co= mmit -text, like this: +stable@vger.kernel.org and mention the kernel version you wish it to be ap= plied +to. When doing so, you must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog o= f your +submission with a separate line above the commit text, like this: =20 .. code-block:: none =20 @@ -154,12 +156,17 @@ or alternatively: =20 [ Upstream commit ] =20 +If the submitted patch deviates from the original upstream patch (for exam= ple +because it had to be adjusted for the older API), this must be very clearly +documented and justified in the patch description. + + Following the submission ------------------------ =20 The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected. This response might take a few -days, according to the developer's schedules. +days, according to the schedules of the stable team members. =20 If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by o= ther developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer. @@ -191,6 +198,7 @@ Review cycle security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle. Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure. =20 + Trees ----- =20 --=20 2.40.1